Why do Americans still insist on using this shit?

the inch is defined to be 2.54 cm

>>16733117
>a ton is defined as 1.01 tons

>>16733119
not quite, but looking into it, the (international arvourdupois) pound is defined to be 0.45359237 kg
and the second is used in both imperial and metric

so, imperial units are entirely defined in terms of metric units

>>16733116 (OP)
So when Americans speak of 1 inch, rest of the world has to convert to 2.54 cm right? kek

eat shit

>>16733117
>>16733126
It's this. America *does* use metric, at least for length, because the definition of the inch is just 2.54 cm. It's not based off of any physical observables or constants, it's literally just a cm multiplied times 2.54. We don't call it metric because Americans are dumb and would riot if we ever got rid of the inch.

>>16733152
that doesnt make any sense, imperial units came first

>>16733153
>https://sketchesofthegate.wordpress.com/2021/07/07/the-measure-of-all-things-a-short-look-at-the-long-history-of-measurement/
>When John Greaves – the 17th century English mathematician and astronomer – made his survey of The Great Pyramid of Giza, he engraved a copy of the English foot on the wall of the King’s Chamber with the accompanying enigmatic inscription: ‘To be observed by all nations.’
>A surveyor divides the space of a circle into 360 parts and an astronomer divides the rhythm of passing phenomena into 365.2422 solar days. 360,000 x 365.2422 produces the earth’s equatorial circumference, in English feet (to 99.9997% accuracy). This curious factorisation may suggest the origin of the English foot, and the reason for its central place in the science of ancient metrology [16].

>>16733152
>It's not based off of any physical observables or constants
The meter isnt either...both are Geocrentric units of arbitrary measure. Literally no better than hand lengths or finger widths.

Both are defined from Geo-Metry (Earth Measure).

>>16733168
meter is defined in terms of the speed of light, and second in terms of the time it takes for the number of transitions between a pair of hyperfine spectral lines in cesium

it's the kilogram that we still don't have a physical definition for. we still use artifacts for that one, but people are looking for ways to change that.

>>16733175
>meter is defined in terms of the speed of light
False.
>It was defined in 1791 as one ten-millionth of the distance from the North Pole to the Equator along the meridian passing through Paris.
Geo-Centric unit of measure.

Never forget "meterfag", you are mortal and hueman.

>it's the kilogram that we still don't have a physical definition for
Holy fuck, yes they do!

HUEMAN! YOU ARE HUEMAN!

>>16733175
the kilogram already got changed

>>16733116 (OP)
Because of political donations from manufacturers that didn't want to retool.

>>16733116 (OP)
>Inch is half the size of my thumb
>Foot is the size of my foot
>Yard the size of my stride
>Etc.
Meanwhile what's the definition of a meter again? Ah yes how could I forget
>one ten-millionth of the distance from the North Pole to the equator along a meridian passing through Paris

>>16733175
>time it takes for the number of transitions between a pair of hyperfine spectral lines in cesium
A totally natural definition! Meanwhile in antiquity
>Civilizations in the classic period and earlier created divisions of the calendar as well as arcs using a sexagesimal system of counting, so at that time the second was a sexagesimal subdivision of the day (ancient second = day/60x60) not of the hour like the modern second (= hour/60x60)

>>16733287
>A meter is about the half the size of the average adult male
> A centimeter is a 100th of that. A milimeter a 10th
>A kilometer is 1000 meters, an so on

versus.

>A foot is 12 inches, a yard is 3 feet, a mile is 1760 yards

Imagine defending retarded Angloid nonsense like their old metric system. It's borderline useless because the relation between all units are so fucking arbitrary compared to multiplying and dividing by powers of 10 when we already use a number system in base 10.

>>16733116 (OP)
i don't use any of those. i use the thumbnail, hand, forearm for length. "about as far as i can see" for distance. whatever's handy for volumes. handfuls, and about as much as i can pick up for masses. standards are for people that steal.

>>16733116 (OP)
We let you use our language, and the French let you use their SI units.
Imperial units are our native language in a world where everyone learns English.
and the obsession with base 10 is pure autism

>>16733251
ah, i knew that people were discussing new definitions a few years back, but i didn't realize that a new definition had been adopted.
the new definition fucks the mol, if i remember right, which is weird because a mol is essentially like a dozen, in that it is a unit of counting (the amount of substance blah blah).

>>16733153

Although imperial units came first, they've all (broadly speaking) since been redefined veeeery slightly, in terms of metric/SI units, which have as their final ground certain physical constants.

>>16733116 (OP)
>this shit?
Agree. You make a lousy conversion chart, OP.

>>16733512
The old mol was just the number of atoms in .12 kg of C12. Though the breakdown in the relationship between the mol and kg is purely superficial. This is because Avogadro's constant is now officially an approximation. In theory if one could find the exact value for the constant the mol would regain its previous relationship.

>>16733168
Yes, it is. To find the length of a meter all you have to do is set up an experiment, measure the Caesium or whatever, derive the constant, then multiply the constant by a bunch of other values, then you get its exact value.

Yes, it's tedious and pain in the ass, and you have to derive all the other units the m is dependent on in this chart>>16733766 first, so seconds, but it's either this or keeping some kind of unit mass in a sterile container and pulling it out whenever you need to verify. Then a cm is 1/100th of a meter and an inch is 2.54 cm. Get schooled namenigger.

>>16733294
While using the Earth's rotation as a basis for time measurements made sense in antiquity, given the limitations of the equipment they were using, its just not good enough for certain modern uses. The Earth's rotation just varies too much day to day for really precise work. If you want something like the GPS system to work you need a more precise.

>>16733780
>Caesium or whatever, derive the constant, then multiply the constant by a bunch of other values, then you get its exact value.
A more precise measure of a Geo-Centric unit, keeping the measured ratio but removing Geo from the equation. All of this "redifining" does is give the ability of a more precise value, it doesnt change what the original value is based off of. The ten millionth of a polar radius.
>Get schooled namenigger.
I SCHOOL YOUR PROFESSORSON METROLOGY. You dont even know what your posting about, youre just copy/pasting what you were told, you have no clue what units of measure are or why multiple exist, or what makes them different

WHY ARE YOU LARPing AT ME?...

>>16733780
The "American" mile and foot and subsequent inch system is based upon the geodesic measure of the Earth at specific latitudes. The 5,280 ft US mile is approximately 1 minute of arc at approximately 30 degrees north or south latitude on the Earth. The exact figures is 87.701 US feet in 1 arc second at exactly 30 degrees north or south, when rounded upwards to 88 for simplification and multiplied by 60 (circular arcs are more efficiently calculated and tracked in a base 12 system) you get 5,280. Hence, a US mile, which is actually just a slight adjustment of the ancient mile and feet systems. A US nautical mile is exactly 1 arc minute at exactly 0 degrees north or south, AKA an equatorial mile.

What Americans did not adopt however was the intermediate slices of the mile, such as the stadia 660 feet or 1/8th of the mile exactly, or 440 feet which is exactly 1/12th of the mile and more base than the stadia. Instead we Amerifats use the 1/16th measure which is exactly 100 yards or 330 feet, and we also use the usual 12 inches to a foot like many of the ancients as well. Why 30 N or S, on a globe or even a flat plane world you can numerically divide the circles or semi circles into 90 (and and 180) hense 30 is a base division of that system neatly and a latitude where more people live in both hemispheres. You should also study numerology and realize that 5,280 is functionally 528 which is functionally 6 in the 369 system of math. The ancients (Romans mostly, the retards of the ancient world, lesser than the Greeks and Egyptians) used the mil system or 1,000 thus 10 base system on top of the older 12 base systems resulting in the word "mile" even though it was not a 10 base division like the older systems (Greek and Egyptian). Most fellow Amerifats are bad at esoteric history and maths in general and do not understand why we use the mile or where it comes from (geodesic actual measure of the Earth, both ancient and contemporary).

>>16733432
>Muh relation
Skill issue, you're just playing with numbers. No one is stopping you from multiplying and dividing by numbers of 10 faggot. Use 10 inches, 100 inches, 1000 inches/feet/yards/whatever if that's what you're so worried about pussy. We use whatever unit is the most practical and efficient for the magnitude of the task at hand and stick with it.

>>16733806
*110 yards

>>16733808
Written like an insecure Americant. I'm not doing more work to guess the the proper conversion units when I can just multiply or divide by some power of 10. Only retards like Americans do more work just to please their fragile egos. Even the fucking Anglos have given up on the imperial system yet a country that prides itself from its independence from Britain still uses a relic of its colonial past.

>>16733508
>Imperial units are our native language in a world where everyone learns English.
All Anglosphere countries outside of the US use metric units because it's just easier to do basic calculations in it.

>the obsession with base 10 is pure autism
Or it just makes shit simple and you don't have to remember some arbitrary conversion some Britbongistani made 400 years ago between one unit to the next. Just look at the prefix of the unit and then move the decimal point to the right or left based on that. Certainly beats having to break out a fucking calculator to do conversions between shit like ozs to tons.

>>16733817
32,000 oz. 16x2 (000)

Anyone that is dealing with tons of material for trade or work does not care about ounces for calculation. Ounces are for more fine tuned work. Grains more finely tuned (7,000 to 1).

>>16733116 (OP)
3.
The better question is why the fuck Europeans are reinventing it in metric.

>>16733806
>The "American" mile and foot and subsequent inch system is based upon the geodesic measure of the Earth at specific latitudes.
Maybe that was true 60 years ago, but not anymore, because the American foot/mile is based off the cm now.